Two Rivers council endorses redevelopment parameters for former Eggers site, signals preference for market‑rate waterfront housing

The Two Rivers City Council on May 27 endorsed redevelopment parameters for the city‑owned 2.325‑acre former Eggers industrial site on the Eastman River, expressing preference for market‑rate housing (owner‑occupied condos preferred), a minimum of 25 feet of public waterfront access owned or controlled by the city, and favorable consideration for proposals that include ground‑floor commercial or food‑and‑beverage uses.

Staff briefed the council on the site history, noting the city acquired the property in 2019; the northern portion contains the stormwater pond and the developable portion measures 2.325 acres after a vacation of Nineteenth Street. The site is currently zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD), which allows flexible residential layouts but requires a specific development plan and council approval.

Staff said the city has Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessments for the property and that the former plant demolition (circa 2006) left substantial subsurface demolition debris in place, a factor that may affect redevelopment costs. The parcel sits in a blight‑elimination TIF district created in 2021; staff reminded the council that the TIF district’s remaining term is finite when considering long‑term assistance.

The council discussed minimum project expectations presented by staff: a suggested minimum of 40 housing units and a minimum project investment on the order of $200,000 per unit (roughly $8 million for a 40‑unit project). Staff also recapped a prior developer proposal from CR Structures that would have included about 51 units; that earlier proposal estimated TIF assistance of $900,000 as an upfront grant plus $900,000 as pay‑as‑you‑go assistance.

Council members emphasized a desire to preserve public waterfront access consistent with the city’s waterfront master plan and asked that any public access be located outside the regulatory floodplain. Members asked staff to clarify ownership, easements and floodplain constraints for any required 25‑foot access strip and requested follow‑up technical work on high‑water marks and dredging potential for dock extensions.

After discussion, the council approved a motion to endorse the parameters in the staff handout (preference for market‑rate units, minimum public access strip, preference for commercial on the first floor) and directed staff to pursue redevelopment discussions with prospective developers. The council then voted to enter closed session under Wisconsin Statute 19.85(1)(e) to deliberate or negotiate the purchase of public property and the investment of public funds; the roll call on the parameters motion and the closed‑session authorization were recorded as ayes by council members present.

The discussion left several open items: confirmation of minimum pricing the city would seek for sale of the parcel (staff mentioned a ballpark asking price of $200,000 that would be negotiable), precise floodplain/high‑water definitions for public access, environmental remediation costs, and whether docking infrastructure would be publicly funded or developed by a private partner. Staff will return with refined parameters and technical details at a later council meeting.